J. R. POLAND
v.
CITY OF PAHOKEE, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision, holding that a taxpayer failed to prove their property was assessed arbitrarily or discriminatorily for tax purposes. The court emphasized that judicial intervention in tax assessments is limited unless there's a clear showing of fraud, illegality, or abuse of discretion.
No, the taxpayer failed to provide sufficient competent proof to support a finding that the assessment was arbitrary and discriminatory to the extent of amounting to fraud.
“A wide discretion must be accorded tax assessors in valuing property for the purposes of taxation.”
Establishes the deference given to tax assessors' valuations.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant sued the City of Pahokee, alleging his land was assessed at approximately 75% of its value for taxation, while other nearby lands were a…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Tax Assessment Valuation cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant instituted suit in equity against the City of Pahokee to procure relief against what he submits is an arbitrary unjust and excessive discrimination against his lands for taxing purposes. The gist of his complaint is that whereas his lands are being assessed for taxation purposes at approximately 75 per centum of their value, other lands in the approximate vicinity are being taxed at a much lower value. The prayer of the bill is that the court determines what just proportion of the tax he should lawfully pay and cancel the remainder of the tax as void and a cloud on his title. Upon final hearing the chancellor found that the plaintiff had failed to sustain the allegations of his bill of complaint with such competent proof as to support a finding that the assessment was so arbitrary and discriminatory as to amount to a fraud upon the tax payer.
*180We have carefully considered the testimony and are of the opinion that the chancellor was correct in his findings and decree. A wide discretion must be accorded tax assessors in valuing property for the purposes of taxation. Unless there be a clear and positive showing of fraud, or illegality, or of an abuse of discretion so arbitrary and discriminatory as to amount to a fraud on the taxpayer or to a denial of the equal protection of the law, the courts will not in general disturb an assessment already made or control the reasonable discretion of tax assessors in making valuations for taxation purposes. Buchanan v. City of Tampa, 134 Fla. 618, 184 So. 104.
The decree appealed from is affirmed.
It is so ordered.
CHAPMAN, C. J., BROWN and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
84 Lumber Co. v. Cooper, 656 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…rom having the issue of reimbursement adjudicated in a lawfully instituted proceeding. The trial court’s order, rendered without jurisdiction, is not entitled to the preclusive effect of res judicata. Florida Nat’l Bank of Jacksonville v. Kassewitz, 25 So. 2d 271 (Fla.1946) (on rehearing). Accordingly, either party is entitled to bring a separate cause of action directed to the issue of reimbursement under the subrogation clause of 84 Lumber’s health plan, assuming such a cause of action still exists. See Ci…
-
Fla. Exp. Tobacco Co., Inc. v. Dep't OF Revenue & Gerald Lewis, 510 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…cated on the decision of a tribunal lacking jurisdiction. A judicial or quasi-judicial decision will not be given res judicata effect where rendered by a tribunal lacking subject matter jurisdiction. Florida National Bank v. Kassewitz, 156 Fla. 761, 25 So. 2d 271 (1946); Bryant v. Small, 258 So. 2d 459 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert, denied, 265 So. 2d 51 (Fla.1972). Subject matter jurisdiction can not be created by waiver, acquiescence or agreement of the parties, or by error or inadvertence of the parties or their co…1 / 2
-
Regero v. Daugherty, 69 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 1953)…s the defendant has not questioned this adjudication by appropriate cross-assignment of error the correctness of this finding is not open to inquiry as between the parties to this appeal. Florida Nat. Bank of Jacksonville v. Kassewitz, 156 Fla. 761, 25 So. 2d 271; Henderson v. Usher, 125 Fla. 709, 170 So. 846. The issue, therefore, is whether property upon which the fee-simple owner resides as the head of a family may be conveyed by the owner and if so, the nature of the consideration that must support such…
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Buchanan v. City of Tampa, 134 Fla. 618 (Fla. 1938)